Taking Back the Narrative

Wednesday, July 5, 2017

Robbie Martin, brother of Empire Files host Abby Martin and creator of A Very Heavy Agenda, has an obsession with ensuring that people maintain their "credibility" by only promoting stories and outlets that are trustworthy. This obsession has been more prevalent than ever since the Pizzagate and Seth Rich conspiracies have gone viral. Robbie has been very outspoken in his criticism of both conspiracies, particularly related to some of the personalities at the forefront of publicizing them. I agree with much of his criticism, as there are powerful and influential figures which have a vested interest in promoting and perpetuating both stories. However, when Robbie Martin uses the issue of "credibility" to attack people who he does not approve of while simultaneously promoting people who have a proven track record of pushing lies and deceit, this becomes a major problem, as I will lay out in this article.

One journalist in particular who Robbie has been very critical of regarding the Seth Rich story is Caitlin Johnstone, a progressive who publishes her articles at Medium.com. Robbie's main gripe with Johnstone appears to be the fact that Mike Cernovich has promoted her work. I am certainly no fan of Mike Cernovich, and while someone as odious as Cernovich promoting anyone is cause for concern, is that alone good enough reason to automatically dismiss someone's overall body of work? Or is there more to it? Is the Cernovich angle a smoke screen for something else? Caitlin Johnstone, along with a number of other Bernie Sanders supporters who are angry with how Bernie was cheated out of the Democratic nomination in 2016, have been very outspokenly critical of progressive outlets such as The Young Turks, mainly for carrying water in support of Hillary Clinton during the election, for perpetuating the government and mainstream media narrative regarding Russian collusion to help Donald Trump, and for refusing to cover the ongoing lawsuit by Bernie supporters against the Democratic National Committee. Abby Martin just last month appeared on TYT as a co host. Why is it that Robbie does not hold TYT to the same standard that he claims to hold others to, even when TYT promotes obvious lies on behalf of the establishment? Is Robbie's criticism of Caitlin Johnstone and other progressives a genuine well intentioned effort on behalf of journalistic integrity, or is it an effort on his part to pre emptively attack those who expose the truth about his sister's media pals?

Robbie's primary criticism of Caitlin Johnstone is her loose at best association with Cernovich and other right wing Trump supporters, which he claims gives credibility to right wing bigots. In doing this, Robbie claims, Johnstone and others are hurting the anti war movement and are giving a bad name to people who responsibly question official government narratives, including September 11th and the ensuing Anthrax attacks. This begs the question: just who do Robbie and Abby Martin consider to be their close allies who are fighting the good fight and carrying the torch for the principled anti war and 9/11 truth movements?

Max Blumenthal for one. The son of longtime Clinton ally and key figure in the destruction of Libya, Sidney Blumenthal, Max has a dubious at best record when it comes to issues related to war and government accountability. For example, while Sidney Blumenthal was busy relaying some of the worst lies about Libya and Gaddafi to Hillary Clinton in an effort to profit from regime change, Max was attacking people who questioned the western media/government consensus that Gaddafi as an evil monster. He referred to former Congresswoman and outspoken opponent of Libyan regime change Cynthia McKinney as the "face of lunacy" for "surrounding herself with 9/11 truthers." Shortly after the September 2012 Benghazi attack, Max wrote an op-ed for The Guardian where he claimed that the attacks were caused by a right wing anti Islam propaganda film, which became the official story from the Obama Administration for why the attack took place. Sidney emailed the article to Hillary Clinton, to which Hillary responded by saying "Your Max is a Mitzvah!" In addition to serving the establishment agenda on the destruction of Libya, Max for years and up until recently promoted similar lies about Syria. For example, Max applauded Jeremy Scahill for refusing to participate in an anti war conference with Syrian nun Mother Agnes Mariam, outspoken in her questioning of the blaming of Assad for the August 2013 chemical weapons attack, labeling her an Assad shill. Max also in 2012 resigned from the Syrian media outlet Al Akhbar, claiming that it is headed by Assad apologists. I detailed in a previous article Max's outspoken hostility towards the 9/11 Truth Movement. Max has recently done a 180 on Syria and now presents himself as being opposed to the policies he once supported. However, he refuses to apologize for or to even acknowledge his previous actions, and apparently he continues to support his father's unapologetic pro Clinton ideology, as he was a featured guest at Sidney Blumenthal's book release party last Summer. Until he publicly addresses all of this and expresses genuine regret for his propagating of lies which have created untold amounts of damage, my belief is that he is not to be trusted. Despite all of this, Max Blumenthal has endorsed both Robbie and Abby Martin, and Abby in particular appears to enjoy publicly associating with Blumenthal.

Joining Max Blumenthal in the esteemed ranks of reliable and credible journalists are Ben Norton and Rania Khalek. Ben and Rania are both very close to Max, and like Max, they both for years promoted the establishment narrative about Assad and Syria before changing their stances just within the past couple of years. Ben Norton has deleted dozens of tweets and other social media posts condemning the Assad government while promoting western propaganda as fact. Norton wrote one of the most vile anti Assad pieces I have encountered, claiming that Assad is supported primarily by anti Semites and Nazi apologists. Norton has also criticizedAbbyMartin, labeling her a conspiracy theorist. Isn't it funny how Abby and Robbie Martin gaining more acceptance within the progressive (foundation and Soros funded) anti war community which opposes 9/11 truth directly coincides with their watering down of long held views regarding what happened on 9/11? Despite all of this, Norton currently helps out with Abby's current program, The Empire Files, and Norton has writtenarticles for Foundation funded AlterNet in support of the show. Khalek, like Norton also has a history of promoting western propaganda which aids Syrian regime change efforts, and has also deletedtweets in which she expressed her support for Western propaganda efforts against the Assad government. Khalek has also tweeted criticism of people who attempt to expose the truth about 9/11. Khalek to her credit, unlike Blumenthal and Norton, has at least tried to explain her past stance and her evolving view, during an interview with Mint Press News. While I do respect Khalek's willingness to acknowledge and express regret for her prior stance, her continued closeness to the likes of Norton and the unapologetic Blumenthal cause me to continue viewing her with skepticism. And even if their change of heart is 100 percent genuine, why do they get the benefit of the doubt? Why is it OK to continue associating with them when they have publicized and repeated known lies? Why doesn't someone like Caitlin Johnstone get the same treatment? Have Rania Khalek and Ben Norton's ignorant and misguided views regarding what happened on September 11th evolved? Or is it Abby and Robbie's views which have changed?

Last but not least is Mike Prysner, significant other to Abby Martin and producer for The Empire Files. A quick overview of Prysner should answer the question at the end of the previous paragraph. Prysner is an Iraq war veteran who first made a name for himself within the anti war movement after a speech he made condemning his war experience. Unlike Blumenthal Khalek and Norton, Prysner does not have a history of promoting lies about Libya and Syria, his view on those conflicts has been consistent. On the other hand, Prysner has been critical of the 9/11 truth movement. Prysner in 2011 tweeted (since deleted) asserting that 9/11 truth is racist. On top of this, Prysner used a pseudonym to attack the co founder of the San Diego 9/11 Truth group on Facebook. Going by the name "PonoPrinair," Prysner (who has very conveniently deleted the posts made by his alter ego) unleashed a verbal assault against Peter Holmes for asking Abby Martin why she did not question Noam Chomsky about September 11th during an interview. During the course of this, he labeled Holmes a sexist and a racist and chastised him for daring to question a female. Somehow though, this behavior is considered acceptable by Robbie Martin. The fact that Abby Martin is an active relationship with a man who believes

It should become clear to any honest person who takes the time to read this article and to check out the links I have provided that Robbie Martin's obsession with credibility and integrity is a charade, and that different standards apply to those who are pals with his sister and those who are not. In Robbie Martin's world, you can say or do pretty much whatever you want and It's perfectly OK, regardless of how vile it is, as long as you are friends with his sister. However, if you're not down with the Martins, then anything short of impeccable standards will be critiqued and scrutinized to the extreme. Let this serve as a classic case study as to what happens when young and talented activists place their careers and getting ahead in media over speaking the full truth.

Abby and Mike (AKA Pono Prinair) having a great time hanging out with Clinton insider son and longtime foundation funded peddler of anti 9/11 truth vitriol and lies about Syria and Libya Max Blumenthal. Where is Robbie Martin's concern about credibility now?????

Mike AKA Pono asks if he is the only person who finds 9/11 truth racist

I will close this article by posting screen caps of the aforementioned Facebook post in which Mike Prysner uses two different accounts to verbally assault Peter Holmes for questioning Abby Martin about not getting Noam Chomsky's thoughts about what happened on September 11th. Keep in mind that this is Abby's producer and significant other.

Abby's old friend Peter Holmes quizzes her on why she did not question Noam Chomsky about 9/11 during their interview.

Mike AKA Pono chastises Peter for criticizing a woman who "is far more accomplished in this field than said man," after continuing to "educate" Peter about why the topics of false flag terror and the role of the Federal Reserve are inconsequential compared to the real roots of the problems affecting the world, racism and sexism! It's not much different, if you ask me, than David Horowitz "educating" Alex Jones about how false flags don't matter because the real conspiracy is that Islam is taking over the West, enabled by the evil Left. Different sides of the same controlled opposition coin.

Now Mike/Pono brings Peter's race into the conversation.

For daring to question Abby about giving Noam Chomsky a free pass on his years of deceptive commentary regarding September 11th and a host of other important issues, Peter is accused of exhibiting white male privilege.

Peter addresses both Mike and "Pono." Did Abby Martin know that Prysner was using two different accounts to attack Holmes with? I think the answer is obvious. And according to Prysner, whether or not elements within the government assassinated the President of the United States is unimportant.

Abby closes the conversation by praising Chomsky and Amy Goodman and Jeremy Scahill as allies. To quote Chomsky, "What difference does it make?" if they keep their massive support bases in the dark about the most consequential event of our generation????? This conversation took place over four years ago, and I can only imagine just how much Abby's views have "evolved" since then. Hard to tell, because she won't even address any of this now.

Robbie Martin, THESE are your allies? What was that again about credibility?

Friday, August 12, 2016

Max
Blumenthal, one of the most influential progressive journalists in the world,
has officially exonerated Abby Martin on charges of "Trutherism." Max’s
judgment came down after Robert Mackey, currently with The Intercept, who while
working for the New York Times publicized a 2008 video of Abby declaring 9/11 an“inside job,”once againcriticized her formerly held assertion.
Max quickly rushed to Abby’s defense, saying that she has never expressed that
view on her TV shows, and even posted a 9/11 centered episode of her RT program
Breaking the Set, defying Mackey to find any “trutherism.” When Mackey
responded by posting the aforementioned 2008 San Diego rally, Max declared it to be McCarthyism. Abby proceeded to like Max’s tweets, and she also
failed to even try and defend the millions of good and decent people worldwide
who have questioned and challenged the official government and media narrative
of what really happened on 9/11. In doing this, Abby has allowed Max
Blumenthal, who has himself expressed anti 9/11 truthsentiments, to slander
those brave enough to challenge the official 9/11 narrative, and she has also
given him the ability to set parameters on what is and is not acceptable
discourse within “progressive” circles. This is not the first time Max has
played the role of thought police in trying to determine what people can and
can’t talk about in order to maintain respectability as a journalist or
activist.

Robert
Mackey, the media hack who used Abby’s 9/11 past to attack her at a time when
she was facing intense media scrutiny, is a disgusting human being. That said, he is
not the issue here. The issue here is the possible consequences and
ramifications of the actions of Abby Martin. Not only has Abby effectively
abandoned the principled stance she once held on 9/11, but she has also allowed
Max Blumenthal with his long history of character assassination
against good and honest people of principle to define
what passes as acceptable 9/11 discourse. Max has no problem with discussion about the involvement of Saudi Arabia and the recently released 28 Pages, which puts
him in the same camp as CNN, the NewYorkTimes, and 60 Minutes, all of which
have given the matter extensive coverage, yet anyone who goes deeper than that has been and will be subjected to slander and ridicule from the same media sources that promote the Saudi connections in a positive light. This is similar to Max’s behavior in
dealing with critics of the conflicts in Libya and Syria, which is no surprise
considering that Max’s father SidneyBlumenthalaided Hillary Clinton in
removing Gaddafi and achieving regime change in Libya. And Max hasn't tried to distance himself or even express disagreement with his father's actions. Whatever her motivations
are, Abby Martin’s courtship of Max Blumenthal coinciding with her abandonment
of the cause of 9/11 truth and justice is something that needs to be discussed, as giving someone like Blumenthal the ability to set parameters of acceptable 9/11 discussion could have huge negative ramifications for the 9/11 justice movement and truth telling efforts in general.